TANVIR AHMAD KHAN, J. -- Petitioner through this Constitutional petition has taken exception to the suit of recovery for an amount of Rs. 6,14,410/- along with liquidated damages filed by the respondent Habib Bank Ltd. Which is now pending adjudication before Banking Court at Sargodha.
2. Learned counsel has stated that the aforesaid suit has been filed in a mala fide manner as the petitioner was not provided with the financial facility originally allowed by the Bank, it is further stated that the petitioner mortgaged his property worth Rs. 85 lacs but the respondent bank without taking into consideration all these aspects has involved the petitioner in the aforesaid recovery suit.
3. I have considered the contention and have gone through the documents appended with this petition, it is reflected from the notice dated 7.9.1999 issued by the respondent bank in the name of the petitioner that running finance limit of Rs. 5 lacs was sanctioned on 15.9.1994. Said facility was availed by the petitioner but in spite of repeated reminders the liability was not liquidated in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The respondent bank authorities, accordingly were constrained to file the afore-mentioned suit. I have also noticed that the petitioner instead of joining the proceedings before the learned Banking Court as envisaged under the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997 has filed the present Constitutional petition. The aforesaid Act has provided a procedure and under Section 10 thereof the petitioner can agitate all the legal points taken in this Constitutional petition in his ing application, in these circumstances, the present Constitutional petition appears to be premature.
Resultantly this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to avail the remedy provided to him under the law.